To cut a long ridiculous ramble short your reasoning goes like this : You keep saying that SAM systems have a limited number of missiles they can fire while conveniently ignoring that the same laws of logistics applies to SEAD aircrafts, did you honestly think that those things grown on trees?Why do some people think SAMs are like some sort of force field that never runs out?
They're there to buy time and effectively defend important sites from attack. They would be especially useful against a weaker enemy. For example if Vietnam and Phillippines tried to destroy those SCS bases, Chinese SAMs will be far more effective than if the USN went in to do that. If the former, Chinese forces will quickly destroy all attacking Viet and Filo platforms while successfully defending against their ordinance by using those HQ-9 and HQ-16s. Against the USN, Chinese forces will need to sink all those carriers and destroy every nearby US base otherwise the onslaught will continue until those HQ-9 and HQ-16s get saturated or run out of missiles.
This means if we're to consider Russia getting hands on F-35 signals vs US getting it's hands on S-400 signals and details, the Russians have far more to gain because that information can help them negate the advantage US F-35s naturally hold at the moment.
We all agree that a few dozen F-35s operating off a carrier is going to obliterate the S-400 site protected whatever Tor M-1s and Pantsirs. Even if the freaking stealth of F-35 isn't effective, Tor M1 and Panstirs and S-400 will run out of missiles! You think they carry hundreds of missiles?!?! Those F-35s will continue to harass and have their way with the SAM site. If the SAM site is on stealth mode and hiding, well the F-35s will just go in and destroy their intended targets anyway. It's freakin joke this point is even being discussed on a military forum. Victor you have made some highly comedic posts in the past and this is yet another hopelessly bad misunderstanding on how military matters work in the real world. Do you also think all missiles always hit their marks and radars are godlike machines of perfection?! Get a clue. Missiles and radars don't hit/pick up targets half the time. They're a coin flip in the BEST of circumstances. Against an F-35 launching stealthy stand off weapons, it's guaranteed the SAM loses.
And the rest of your post is hogwash, we never agreed to anything of the sort. You say missiles and radars don't hit all of the time, then the sames applies to anti radiation missiles as well.
You ignore how trained SAM operators managed to avoid SEAD operations and successfully shoot down stealth aircrafts in the past, which is made even more impressive with the dated equipment that they have.
The only comedian here is you with your highly biased setup of SAM systems vs SEAD aircrafts.